Alabama Sues Census Bureau Over illegal Aliens

Even though Republicans control all three branches of government, Americans must keep in mind the bureaucracies are infested with progressives who’re doing their damnedest to plug up the swamp. The Census Bureau has an incredible amount of influence on apportionment. Their count determines which state gains or loses a congressional seat. And millions upon millions of illegal aliens have distorted our electoral system.


Alabama has taken a decisive step in making sure only Americans are counted. Here is an excerpt from the Washington Examiner:


Alabama’s attorney general and one of its Republican congressman are suing the federal government over a practice that allows illegal immigrants to be counted in the census.


The lawsuit filed Tuesday by state Attorney General Steve Marshall and Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., challenges the Census Bureau rule and argues the measure will cause Alabama to lose a congressional seat and an electoral vote after the 2020 Census to a “state with a larger illegal alien population.”


“Congressional seats should be apportioned based on the population of American citizens, not illegal aliens,” Brooks said in a statement. “After all, this is America, not the United Nations.”


Brooks warned that the loss of one Alabama congressional seat could be a “huge loss in Alabama’s political influence” and diminish both the state’s influence in Congress, as well as “its importance in presidential elections.”


This is also a national security issue. When we count invaders in the census, they get representation. That’s how traitors like Luis Gutierrez are able to roam the halls of Congress. In order to save the country, we must first save the Census Bureau.


Source:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alabama-sues-federal-government-for-counting-illegal-immigrants-in-census?utm_source=keywee&utm_medium=facebook&kwp_0=819904&kwp_4=2809992&kwp_1=1192432

The Federal Government's Creepy "American Community Survey"

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Liberals love to use the preamble of the Constitution to justify stealing from their neighbors to fund projects they deem fundamental for the general welfare.  The consequences are an intrusive government that has no boundaries even to the point of wanting to know what kind of plumbing you have in your house.  I am not kidding.

These past few months, I’ve received inquiries from the Commerce Department via the Census Bureau that are outrageous and creepy.  Here is what they want to know about me as listed on their brochure:

Employment

Education

Veteran

Income and Housing Cost

Commuting habits

Disability and Health Insurance

Housing Characteristics

Owner and Renters

People and Relationships

Who in their right mind would want to divulge every aspect of their life to a bureaucrat? 

When the Framers presented the Constitution to the States for ratification, detractors recognized its inherent flaws.  They demanded a bill of rights to protect citizens from a government that could justify anything through the power of the purse and the elastic clauses therein.  The pseudonymous writer, Brutus, wrote the following:

 It is well known that the subject of revenue is the most difficult and extensive in the science of government. It requires the greatest talents of a statesman, and the most numerous and exact provisions of the legislature. The command of the revenues of a state gives the command of every thing in it. — He that has the purse will have the sword, and they that have both, have every thing; so that the legislature having every source from which money can be drawn under their direction, with a right to make all laws necessary and proper for drawing forth all the resource of the country, would have, in fact, all power.

Brutus later wrote about how intrusive the general government will be including sticking its nose in your bathroom which is exactly one the provisions required in this mandatory survey.  Here is an excerpt:

This power, exercised without limitation, will introduce itself into every comer of the city, and country — It will wait upon the ladies at their toilett, and will not leave them in any of their domestic concerns; it will accompany them to the ball, the play, and the assembly; it will go with them when they visit, and will, on all occasions, sit beside them in their carriages, nor will it desert them even at church; it will enter the house of every gentleman, watch over his cellar, wait upon his cook in the kitchen, follow the servants into the parlour, preside over the table, and note down all he eats or drinks; it will attend him to his bed-chamber, and watch him while he sleeps; it will take cognizance of the professional man in his office, or his study; it will watch the merchant in the counting-house, or in his store; it will follow the mechanic to his shop, and in his work, and will haunt him in his family, and in his bed; it will be a constant companion of the industrious farmer in all his labour, it will be with him in the house, and in the field, observe the toil of his hands, and the sweat of his brow; it will penetrate into the most obscure cottage; and finally, it will light upon the head of every person in the United States. To all these different classes of people, and in all these circumstances, in which it will attend them, the language in which it will address them, will be GIVE! GIVE!

Give!  Give!  Give your money and every aspect of your daily habits so the federal government can ascertain the needs of your community.  That is what the American Community Survey is all about.

A field agent from the Census Bureau kept leaving messages on my door which I ignored.  He somehow got my cell number and called me at work.  Here is how that conversation went:

Agent:  Mr. Coston, the Commerce Department has sent you a survey to fill out.  Have you received it?

Me:  Yes and I don’t wish to participate.

Agent:  Mr. Coston, by law you are required to complete this survey.

Me:  By law, I have the 4^th Amendment.

Agent:  Sir, Article I Section 2 says …

Me: I know what Article I Section 2 says and I already gave you that information in the last census. 

I then hung up.  But that wasn’t the end of it.  He kept leaving messages on my door until I finally left my own telling him to get a warrant.  He then called me again. 

Agent:  (a little perturbed) Mr. Coston, when can we set up a meeting?

Me:  I told you I wasn’t participating.  I left you a message on my door and now        I’m going to tell you what is says and that is to get a warrant.

Agent:  Oh, so you want to go to the courts?!

Me:  Bring it on!

I’ve read posts by conservative bloggers who’ve gone through this experience and they’ve handled it in a much more diplomatic way.  They’ve cited case law and all sorts of crap.  I, on the other hand, decided on a more direct manner and so far, I haven’t heard anything, yet.

Source:

http://www.constitution.org/afp/brutus06.htm

http://www.constitution.org/afp/brutus05.htm

Census Bureau's Household Income Bubbles Burst

Have you heard the news?  American household incomes rose a whopping 5.2 percent in the previous year.  We haven’t seen this kind of economic prosperity since 1967.  Holy cow!  All of our champagne dreams and caviar wishes have come true.  What’s that?  You don’t believe those numbers?  But, they came from the Obama administration’s Census Bureau.  It has to be true.  Let’s do the math.

The 2015 real median earnings of men ($51,212) and women ($40,742) who worked full time, year round increased 1.5 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively, between 2014 and 2015.

Oops.

So the 5.2% increase in median household income came from the man of the house earning 1.5% more and the woman of the house earning 2.7% more? That’s some math!

If a couple earned an average of 1.9% more, where did the other 3.3% increase come from?

The report shows the number of men and women working. Could that have been the source of the gain in household income? Nope. The number of men working increased by just 2.3% and the number of women working rose by 1.9%. Obviously some of those formed additional households. So an increase in the number of working persons per household could not account for the 5.2% in median income per household.

What happened?  Is it possible the Obama administration fudged the numbers once again?  Say it isn’t so.

Source:

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/2015-average-wages-up-1-9-median-household-income-up-5-2-yeah-thats-the-ticket/

Illegal Aliens Affect Electoral College

Illegal immigration is insidious in more ways than one.  Pundits tend to focus on the impact they have on local communities.  What no one talks about is the ramifications these diasporas have on our federal elections and the way politicians pander to non-citizens who have garnered as much representation in the halls of Congress as an American citizen.

The Center for Immigration Studies published a report demonstrating the influence illegal aliens and legal non-citizens have in the distribution of congressional districts and ultimately deciding presidential elections via the Electoral College.  Here is an excerpt:

Non-citizens Have Large Impact. Immigration has a significant effect on the distribution of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives for three reasons. First, seats are apportioned based on each state's total population relative to the rest of the country, including illegal aliens and other non-citizens. This, of course, is the issue at the center of Congresswomen Miller's proposal. Second, congress has chosen to allow in a large number of legal immigrants and to tolerate wide spread illegal immigration. After the 2000 Census, the average congressional district had roughly 650,000 people. Thus, the more than 18 million non-citizens in the 2000 Census were equal to nearly 29 congressional seats. The third reason is that non-citizens are not evenly distributed throughout the country. In 2000, half of all non-citizens lived in just three states and almost 70 percent live in just six states. States with a large non-citizen population will gain at the expense of states comprised mostly of citizens.

Impact of Non-Citizens on Apportionment. In a report entitled, "Remaking the Political Landscape: The Impact of Illegal and Legal Immigration on Congressional Apportionment," published by the Center for Immigration Studies in October of 2003, we calculated the impact of non-citizens on the distribution of seats in the House.⁵ Overall we found that the presence of non-citizens caused a total of nine seats to change hands. Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin each lost a seat that they had prior to the 2000 Census while Montana, Kentucky and Utah each failed to gain a seat they other wise would have gained, but for the presences non-citizens in other states. Of the nine seats redistributed by non-citizens, 6 went to California, while Texas, New York and Florida each gained a seat and New York retained a seat it otherwise would have lost. Analysis of this kind is very straightforward, involving a simple calculation of the apportionment of seats to states with non-citizens included and then without them. Other researchers have come to the same conclusion.⁶

Impact of Illegal Aliens. In our 2003 apportionment study we also tried to estimate the impact of illegal aliens by themselves. The former INS has estimated the size and state distribution of illegals who responded to the Census, and we used those figures to estimate their impact on the distribution of House seats. We found that of the nine states that lost seats due to non-citizens, four were the result of illegals. This makes perfect sense because 40 to 45 percent of non-citizens are illegal aliens. Indiana, Michigan, and Mississippi each lost one seat in the House and Montana failed to gain a seat it otherwise would have gained because of illegal aliens in other states.

Impact on Electoral College. Immigration and the resulting non-citizen population not only redistributes seats in the House, it has the same effect on presidential elections because the apportionment of the Electoral College is based on the same basic calculations as congressional delegations. Thus immigration policy and the resulting large non-citizen population it produces impacts the distribution of political influence both in Congress and in the Executive.

We need to reform the way congressional districts are apportioned.  States with a high concentration of illegal aliens and legal non-citizen residents will lose their influence, not only in the halls of Congress, but in deciding presidential elections.  Can anyone say California?

Source:

http://cis.org/node/554

Census Bureau: 35.4% Americans on Federal Welfare

Townhall.com reported the following disturbing statistic:

109,631,000 Americans lived in households that received benefits from one or more federally funded "means-tested programs" -- also known as welfare -- as of the fourth quarter of 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the Census Bureau.

The Census Bureau has not yet reported how many were on welfare in 2013 or the first two quarters of 2014.

But the 109,631,000 living in households taking federal welfare benefits as of the end of 2012, according to the Census Bureau, equaled 35.4 percent of all 309,467,000 people living in the United States at that time.

That doesn’t count the “non-means-tested programs” or in other words entitlement programs.

U.S. Poverty Rate Highest in 52 Years

When Obama and the democrats decided to follow the FDR economic model, you just new things wouldn’t turn out well. Now we have a poverty rate, unlike any other since the U.S. Census Bureau began gathering data:

The U.S. poverty rate rose to the highest level in almost two decades and household income fell in 2010, underscoring the lingering impact of the worst economic slump in seven decades.

Data released by the Census Bureau today showed the proportion of people living in poverty climbed to 15.1 percent last year from 14.3 percent in 2009, and median household income declined 2.3 percent. The number of Americans living in poverty was the highest in the 52 years since the U.S. Census Bureau began gathering that statistic. Those figures may have worsened in recent months as the economy weakened.

“Families are struggling to put food on the table, and they don’t have the purchasing power to help the economy recover,” said Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

We now have 46.2 million people who’ve descended into the ranks of poverty. The 1930’s was called the Great Depression for a reason. Unfortunately, those in power haven’t learned from history and have condemned all of us to repeat it.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-13/poverty-in-u-s-climbed-to-17-year-high-in-2010-as-household-income-fell.html